[Niamh.]

Wow this is awful, imagine some of these babies could still be alive if the hospital hadn't tried to brush it under the carpet. I hope they get sued to **** by the parents

[bots]

the impact statements from the bereaved and affected is over whelming

[Niamh.]

Originally Posted by bitontheslide

the impact statements from the bereaved and affected is over whelming

I don't understand how she's allowed to stay away, she should be forced to listen to that (not that it would even effect her, if she's someone who's capable murdering those helpless little babies in the first place)

[bots]

Originally Posted by Niamh.

I don't understand how she's allowed to stay away, she should be forced to listen to that (not that it would even effect her, if she's someone who's capable murdering those helpless little babies in the first place)

in a way, it will get her the maximum sentence possible, because she is trying to control events of the trial, and the judge wont look leniently on that

[Niamh.]

Originally Posted by bitontheslide

in a way, it will get her the maximum sentence possible, because she is trying to control events of the trial, and the judge wont look leniently on that

I hope so. She should never be let out. She should be sentenced separately for each baby she killed

[arista]

Originally Posted by Niamh.

I don't understand how she's allowed to stay away, she should be forced to listen to that (not that it would even effect her, if she's someone who's capable murdering those helpless little babies in the first place)

PM Sunak
could have brought a Law in
it would have taken 2 days
in Parliament
and would have the backing of MP's


PM Sunak is at fault.

[AnnieK]

Originally Posted by bitontheslide

the impact statements from the bereaved and affected is over whelming

I had to stop reading them....it was heartbreaking to read, how they have lived through it is beyond me. I don't agree with the death penalty but there is a few exceptions I would make

[user104658]

The thing is legally its basically impossible to make attendance mandatory without also making it necessary - if that makes sense. So if you make it that the criminal can't choose to be absent from the legal process, you also make it that if the criminal CANNOT attend in person (e.g. poor health or simply too dangerous/volatile) then the trial and/or sentencing has to be delayed indefinitely.

In terms of a trade off, it's better to have it non-compulsory.

Also the perceived benefit to family can end up actually being harmful, because what they're looking for is that catharsis of seeing the perpetrator being broken/devastated when sentenced but often they don't get that. Often met with someone who is dissociating (totally blank) or unrepentant and even mocking/taunting.

[arista]

This Judge
has finally getting to the sentence


Whole Life in Prison
She is to die in prison

[Zizu]

Originally Posted by arista

This Judge
has finally getting to the sentence


Whole Life in Prison
She is to die in prison

Sooner rather than later , hopefully

They got to that other monster Peter Sutcliffe eventually


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

[Niamh.]

Originally Posted by arista

This Judge
has finally getting to the sentence


Whole Life in Prison
She is to die in prison

Good news

[The Slim Reaper]

Life in prison is the only sensible sentence. The state shouldn't be killing people, even if they are guilty of the most heinous of crimes.

[hijaxers]

No doubt she'll appeal ~ i think no show for sentencing should cancel any grounds for appeal for this evil woman.

[Niamh.]

Originally Posted by The Slim Reaper

Life in prison is the only sensible sentence. The state shouldn't be killing people, even if they are guilty of the most heinous of crimes.

I agree but I think for cases where multiple crimes were committed like in this case, they should get a sentence for each crime and those sentences should run back to back not at the same time

[bots]

in 10 years, the prison service will say she is a model prisoner and that she regrets her actions and they will let her out

[Crimson Dynamo]

she should be shot in the back of her head and her body burned

[Livia]

Originally Posted by LeatherTrumpet

she should be shot in the back of her head and her body burned

I agree.

[Redway]

I have no words.

[Gusto Brunt]

It's crazy we have a law that says a convicted killer decides to attend court or not.

Madness.

I was spitting feathers when the Judge was talking 'to her' in her absence. Her choice. Who the fook does she think she is!

[user104658]

The death sentence should never even be an option unless there's no question of guilt (i.e. caught red handed). For any crime. Trials by jury on balance of evidence are not, have never been and never will be infallible and there are waaay too many documented miscarriages of justice to be killing people based on a jury verdict. You just never hear about most of the overturned convictions. Not juicy enough for the press.

Not making a comment on this case in particular; just the idea of capital punishment vs jury of peers in general.

Put it this way; your jury could be made up of 10 random TiBB members.

F* **.

[Zizu]

Originally Posted by Soldier Boy

The death sentence should never even be an option unless there's no question of guilt (i.e. caught red handed). For any crime. Trials by jury on balance of evidence are not, have never been and never will be infallible and there are waaay too many documented miscarriages of justice to be killing people based on a jury verdict. You just never hear about most of the overturned convictions. Not juicy enough for the press.

Not making a comment on this case in particular; just the idea of capital punishment vs jury of peers in general.

Put it this way; your jury could be made up of 10 random TiBB members.

F* **.

What about those monsters who beheaded one of our soldiers on broad daylight … encouraging passers-by to video their slaughter


The last I heard is that the British taxpayers were paying for their appeal costs !!!

Aghhhhhhh !!!! No

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

[user104658]

Originally Posted by Zizu

What about those monsters who beheaded one of our soldiers on broad daylight … encouraging passers-by to video their slaughter

I think that would surely fall under the category of "caught red handed" ...

I'm against capital punishment in general but LESS against it when there's 100% concrete unquestionable guilt.

"Found guilty on balance of evidence by a jury" is not unquestionable guilt, miscarriages of justice are uncovered regularly, and verdicts are overturned. The justice system is not infallible, and gets it wrong from time to time.

Likewise if we are going to let our authorities end lives, it should at the very least always be for level-headed reasoning (i.e. an individual is simply too dangerous to continue existing safely). Not out of emotion/outrage/anger.

[bots]

as long as evidence can be faked/planted there is always room for doubt in the process. I know that's extremely unlikely as the police never do anything wrong

[The Slim Reaper]

The state shouldn't be murdering people, full stop. Matching barbarism with barbarism is revenge, not justice.

[Crimson Dynamo]

Originally Posted by The Slim Reaper

The state shouldn't be murdering people, full stop. Matching barbarism with barbarism is revenge, not justice.

its justice and closure for victims which is the prime motivation, liberal morality signaling is not welcome

also it saves taxpayers millions